Marketing Communications Blog

Pet Poison and the Brand

Just had to follow-up on this and what I had written earlier about this.

Remember how I alluded to the fact that the Pet Food BRANDS left the food manufacturer out to dry (since they shipped the poison, they should be the ones that fall on the sword)? Well, sadly, companies don't realize that consumers don't always expect the right company to fall on the sword.

Watching the news this morning, they interviewed pet owners, who ALL SAID:

"You would expect, from these major brands, that charge more money for better ingredients, to have done a better job."

No, they didn't say "You would expect, from the guys who supply the materials to the brand, that they would have done a better job".

I am amazed that these companies continue to sit back and watch this blow over - which, don't get me wrong, it will, but, this is an opportunity for the brands.  Sadly, they don't see it.

Posted by blaine at 07:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Branding Success Notes

A lot of you have been writing me about the values of a successful brand - or - what makes a brand(name) successful?

Here are the three that I think are very important:

• Intrinsic Values: When a brand (name) is mentioned, an image or idea is conveyed - this image or idea transcends the product context
• Expansiveness: The brand (name) is able to support multiple messages and be able to grow and adapt with product change
• Credibility: The brand (name) is believeable among consumers, within the product's category or context

I know, I know, these three are mentioned in most branding and marketing books, but, I keep getting the questions and I am here to help.

Continue writing me if there are more questions on this and I will post.

Posted by blaine at 01:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

How important are looks?

Over my years as a spokesperson for the various companies I have worked for, one overwhelming fact continued to be true - that looks to affect how people view you - and that is most important in your Public Relations activities.

A few years back, I was going on tour with one of my Marketing Managers in Europe. A couple of facts, a) my Marketing Manager had never done a tour before and was extremely nervous about doing it, b) she (yes, a woman) was absolutely beautiful, c) she was from Romania and liked to dress like a Romanian woman, and d) she knew French and English (along with other languages that were not important in Europe).

I knew that I had to address some of these items so that we could get the best response from the editors and analysts that we would be meeting.

First, we went through an extensive media training course so that she would be able to do the interviews (instead of me).

Second, we made her beauty an asset. Any man, and any appreciateve woman, would recognize the beautiful woman that she was - and I did not want that to be wasted.  She dressed, what I can only call, severly. She would pull her hair back into a ponytail, TIGHT!!! So that she looked "severe". Wore very little make-up and wore clothes with very little color.

It was extremely difficult for me to tell her that I did not like the way she dressed and that I wanted her to change her looks. In America, I knew that I would be sued in a second, and my many years of managing American's made me leary of approaching her, let alone discussing this. But, she took it the way I thought she would, as a professional and someone who wanted to improve herself and make a success of the tour.  But, I did, and she did.

We went on tour, and WOW, it was great, the sexist French editors could only stare at any part of her body below her face, but, she was good, making sure to remind them to "write this down" so that they would have a story when we finished.

I must admit, what I wrote above did not occur on the first day, but, by the third day of the two week tour, she had it down cold and was able to pitch the story as well as interact with any men that appreciated her looks.

I am not sexist, but, I am a realist and know that men appreciate having a beautiful woman in their office (or be seen walking one down the hallway of their office).

Another example of this, done a little more blatantly, was something one of my companys competitors did back in the early 1990's.

The year was 1991, the company I worked for - Nintendo, our competitor - Sega.

Sega, to get the story, and to get the sale, hired Playboy Bunnies as their spokespeople, as well as their "honorary salespeople". 

Not only did editors and analysts "appreciate" having Bunnies come in and speak with them, but, buyers from all the major toy retailers "demanded" to have meetings with Sega salespeople (as long as the other sales people came along - hint hint).

Sex sales. Yes, it is hard to accept (if you are a woman that doesn't appreciate what she has and how to use it). But, years ago, seeing a woman get an interview and me not, showed me that a) looks sale, and b) sex sales. 

As for you men, you still have to dress nice. Smell nice. And above all, be sincere.

Posted by blaine at 04:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

To recall or not to recall - WHAT DO WE DO???

By now, everyone knows that petfood is killing pets.

And, everyone is now saying - why aren't the petfood "brands" doing more? Why is it all coming down to the manufacturer that has to do everything and not the brand? Why aren't the brand names doing something for the pet owners?

The debate is just heating up and I'm sure that there will be many case studies done in colleges around the world on what was done, what should have been done, and how it could have been done better.

I'm sure that you are surprised that the brands haven't done more - I am.

Here are incredible brands, known very well, doing nothing.

So, here is my case study:

1) Own up to the mistake and apologize - publicly.
2) Make restitution to the pet owners - the manufacturer is out millions and millions of dollars, but, the brand can only lose it's image (which, of course, also affects the bottom line) - so, to provide a $1000 or even $10000 to the 20 pets that have been proven to have died from this trajedy is nothing, compared to saving the brand.
3) Be the FIRST to come forward (see #1) - don't be the last. This almost reminds me of a surreal movie, where the first one to step forward will be killed (where I believe the first one to step forward will be applauded).
4) Immediately come out with a recall of ALL of your products from that category. I have a pet and we feed them IAM's wet food - so, if I was CMO at IAM's, I would pull all of the IAM's wet food from every store and replace it (of course, I would inspect all food coming back and destroy the bad).
5) Get out front and discuss this - get on all the TV programs - discuss what happened, and talk about what we are going to do to correct it. What we are thought we did right (i.e. safety and quality control).

It really isn't that hard. It makes sense to let the food manufacturer stand out there, on their own and die - which they are going to do anyway. But, again, as a pet owner, I had questions about the "brands" quality and caring.  As I'm sure that there are millions of others (pet owners) that have questions also.

The one thing, ONE THING that you have as a company, that must be protected at ALL costs, is your brand. To stand to one side and let something else affect it is not correct. You, as a future or current CMO or Marketing Executive, should NOT allow something like this to happen.

Posted by blaine at 01:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Who are we and how can we grow?

Saw another story on how a young author is traveling the country talking to people and telling them to pursue their strengths; and that corporate America is looking at this as "WOW, this is something new!!!.

It amazes me, and I have to write this, that this is something new to the corporate markets out there.  Truly amazing.

Maybe it was because I was trained with the Japanese mentality (my first few companies were Japanese owned) - or I had incredible mentors out there.

I don't know, but, it amazes me that you, a manager, aren't surrounding yourself with people who can "shore" up your weaknesses - or, in a positive spin, "compliment your strengths".

I know my weaknesses.  That accounting is not something I am great at - so, have an outstanding bookkeeper that knows more then me around. That I am creative, but, not the greatest in the world - so, have other creative people around me to "fine tune" my creative side.

I am discovering, and maybe this is why the other gentleman is so successful, that companies don't want to hear about your weaknesses (like, right!!! I tell everyone my weaknesses - but, I DO hire to shore them up), that they only want to hear that you can "do the job and get it done". Their job descriptions are above and beyond any individual in the world.

For example, looking through the want ads at a web site the other day, the position was for a VP of Marketing - and the description wanted someone that had 10 years in advertising (agency), 10 years in advertising (corporate), five years in sales, 10 years in web design, 10 years in traditional advertising, 10 years in web advertising, click thru knowledge and expertise, AND, in conclusion, will only accept resumes from people who are currently working (or worked) at Yahoo or Google - starting salary $120K.

I bet that they are getting 100's of qualified candidates on that one. Not.

I have always been realistic, as well as been realistic with the companies and clients that I worked with/for. If they ask me to do something that I am not the best at, I tell them that I will bring on another person, at no additional charge, that can help us with that. If they want someone that knows the ins and outs of data-mining, then, I can't help them, but, I do know people who can and can provide that info to me for our general marketing strategy.

The point is - as a consultant or working in a company - KNOW your strengths, hire people who can fill the weaknesses you have, and for g*ds sake, don't play politics with this (meaning that if you hire someone who has a strength that you don't have, they aren't out to get your job), accept it. Because, you know what? You will do a better job for the company and will get promoted that much sooner.  See my earlier posts about training someone to take over you job.

Posted by blaine at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

PR 101

Woke up the other night and remembered a nightmare that happened to me a few years ago working for a very young and immature Israeli company.

The company had hired me to do their marketing, which included their public relations activities. As usual, I did not just sit back and do it half-way. I went after Fortune, Business Week, Wall Street Journal, but, on the other hand, I also went after Playboy, PC Magazine, The Robb Report, Mac Home Journal, and anything else that would write about us.

The nightmare involved the Wall Street Journal and Walt Mossberg.  Two weeks before the WSJ ran our story, I had a great two page story from Business Week. The CEO and CFO were ecstatic - the investors were besides themselves with praise and excitement about the company and product.

So, two weeks later, there, on the weekly technology section that Walt puts out, was a picture of our product and how it was going to change the world (I did the interview with Walt while on vacation in D.C. - don't EVER think that an Israeli company will reward you for going the extra mile).

In the article, Walt spoke about how small our company was (only 100 people and less then $100M in sales) and that some other company would probably take ownership of the product and own the market.

My CEO and CFO were livid. Now, I worked and lived in Israel. My CEO and CFO lived and worked in Israel. I walk into the office (I lived 15 minutes from the office, had a cell phone, etc.), and there, on my computer, was an email from my PR agency (in Los Angelas), saying that the CEO and CFO were trying to get ahold of Walt and can I do anything about it.

Of course, I had NO clue what was going on. And in short order, I found out what the h**l was going on. And calmed them down (they wanted Walt to put a retraction in the next days paper saying that he was speculating and was sorry for saying what he did).

My PR agency and I were besides ourselves, on EACH SIDE!!! On one side, because we had our company and a picture of our product reviewed by Walt. On the other hand, because our CEO and CFO pissed on all the groundwork that we had laid with Walt (for future products) because they didn't understand what Public Relations was and how it works.

Never, EVER, let your CEO, CFO, or anyone sacrifice a contact of yours. Never ever let someone who was NOT involved in the interview process become involved, after the fact.  When you are promoted into a marketing postion or come into a company as a marketing executive, make sure that you get buy-off from the C-level management that you can do what you need to do to make the company a success - without their interference.

Would love to hear some of your horror stories out there.

Posted by blaine at 05:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Wiki's - How important are they?

I have been, as I am sure you have been, reading and seeing all this controversy, discussion, and issues with having and doing a Wiki - either inside your company or one outside your company.

As usual, I have a comment on this.

Wiki's are great!!! Internally. Let your workers and employee's educate each other with a Wiki.

One company I recently worked with would have monthly training classes for non-division employee's. Meaning - divisions would attend a meeting, put on by another division, to learn about the product that that division was working on/in. Two to four hours a month in these meetings may have helped morale or understanding, but, loss of work was also high (to many of the meetings were attended by people who didn't want to do their existing work and this was an easy approved out of doing it).

In hi-tech, this is very common, where one division does not know what the other division does or has with its similar product and cross education/training is done.

My point is is a Wiki can do that same education in "real time" and everyone can contribute and add details and info, so the whole picture is understood by all.

But, a Wiki outside? To the general public? I can see it happening if you want to do it as "fun" or as a "joke" - which Wikipedia is quickly becoming. When Wikipedia begins to turn political (more then it is now), it will quickly lose it's luster as a "general" information base - it will fall into a label, where it will be difficult, if not impossible to get out (i.e. if it is labeled a "right wing conspiracy site", then, only those that believe they are part of the right wing conspiracy will go there).

I appreciate the value of a wiki and what it means for free speech and free collaboration. But, without safeguards in place (i.e. review of content in some way), then, they will quickly become the way of the street corner preacher (you don't see them as much anymore do you? They realized it is easier to preach to captured audiences then to people who don't care).

Think this through, if you are going to do a Wiki - understand that the content that may be posted may not be what you want. That the content may hurt your company - and be prepared for it.

Don't get me wrong - a Wiki can also bring someone or something "back from the dead", like Wikipedia did with Sinbad - BRILLIANT move by his agent to bring an actor that has dissappeared back into the limelight.

Make sure that you, the leader of your marketing, are part of the decision making process AND that all of your concerns are brought up AND understood by all parties who will be administering it.

Just because having/doing a Wiki today is the "hot" thing to do doesn't mean it is the RIGHT thing to do.

Posted by blaine at 05:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Do you really need marketing?

The other night, was thinking about a new potential client, and if they really needed to do marketing or not.

At lunch that day, we had been discussing Chipotle restaurants and how they do very little marketing, and was it right or not? Was it what they wanted (in growth)? Slower rather then faster - and then, who could guarantee that it would grow? Or would the marketing eat into their profit.

So, I started to think about the need for marketing with a product/service/brand or not.

Obviously, if the product is "hot", then, marketing doesn't need to be huge - right? The product is selling itself and the Public Relations efforts are keeping it in the news - so, why do TV or Radio or whatever?

If the product is unknown, brand new, and customers don't understand the value, then, marketing is needed, right?

Back in the days when I was the chief marketing person for the USB Flash Drive at the patent holder, M-Systems; they gave me no money (less then $100K) a year to do all the marketing needed for this product. (FYI - The market today for this product is over $2B).

There were a couple of ways that I could attack this:

• As mentioned in a previous entry, I could scream and fight with the CEO/CFO for more money
• I could only market to analysts and editors what the product was (in a particular region, like U.S., Germany, etc.)
• I could go after one small region of the world and market the product (like NYC or LA only)
• I could give the money to a retailer as MDF or Co-Op funding and have them advertise the product (as best they could with so little money)
• Or many other things

The skepticism of the product from the mass market was palpable. Who needed a device that had 256MB on it? We had the floppy for little things, cd-r and dvd-r for larger things (even though the Software caused early heart attacks in many users), the zip, and of course, the network where we could upload and download gigabytes of info.

So, that is where I attacked. I needed to educate the "early adopters" as to why they needed this product - there was no way that every secretary in the world was going to run and buy this device if they saw it on tv. I needed to hit those that would realize the value of it; that they would tell others, and so on (the perfect and ideal marketing tactic).

But, back to the heading of this entry - do you or do you not need to put moneys into marketing?

Sadly, that depends on so many things. Here are just some of them:

• The brand - known?
• The product - needed?
• Mass market or niche market appeal?
• Educated or non-educated market?
• Hispanic, white, etc. market?
• OEM, Retail, Direct, Web sales?

So many things - that all need to be laid out and understood - which then will lead to your marketing plan, and ultimately if you need to do, and what you need to do, for marketing.

Posted by blaine at 08:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Innovation Again

So, to continue from a couple of days ago.

Was reading another magazine (IN magazine) and there was a great article about Innovation and how it is overused and not understood by people in marketing.

So much so that they are now saying that there will be (if not already occuring) a back-lash against companies that overuse the word in their marketing campaigns.

Now, let's recap real quick - what I was referring to in the previous Innovation post was how marketing people say that marketing has to be innovative (whereas, above in IN magazine, they are talking about, what I also said in the previous posting, that Innovation is in TECHNOLOGY).

Thank g*d, in the article, that the Marketing people that were interviewed to comment on the subject consistently referred to technology as being innovative, that the innovation comes from the patents (where, by using a cartoon instead of a live character in an advertisement, does the "innovation" come in?).

I almost sound defensive when I am talking about this. I don't want to be (and I am not), but, I want to make sure that with the coming "death" of the word Innovation, that the word continues to refer to technology products, services, or experiences, and NOT Marketing.

Posted by blaine at 10:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Innovation in Marketing

Was reading over a document from a CMO that had recently hired me to some research work for her.

In the document (really a memo), she kept informing the reader (her staff and company board) that for her company to succeed, there had to be innovation in the marketing effort(s).

Doing some quick checks on the Internet, marketing innovation is a hot topic out there among marketing professionals.

I do consider myself a marketing professional (doing this for 20 years), but, I have never been one to "glom" onto a belief or specific way to do something. I guess that's why I am such a success at so many levels, because I don't follow what everyone else does, I do what I think is correct (and 99% of the time, it provides incredible success).

So, back to the marketing innovation (enough about me - you are here to learn or gain insight) that I am seeing and reading about.

Throughout my life, in reading books, meeting people, etc., innovation was constantly used in conjunction with entrepreneurs and inventors - these people were brilliant and thought of new products and/or services that have never been thought of before - thus allowing our life to change and become more profitable (be it with time, money, or whatever we consider to be "profit").

In other words, innovation was used for something "new" that "impacted" our lives.

Does innovation in marketing mean that it is new? Or impacts our life?

Is a new TV spot that makes us laugh, or think, innovative? A paper ad? A web banner?

I don't think so. We have to gain the attention of our audience - if it is by doing something new, then, yes, that is innovative. But, what, in the past decade, or 25 years, have we seen as "new".

Let's look and think:

• Web banner ads (okay, innovative the FIRST time, but, now? okay, now we use flash instead of HTML, but, was that innovative, or just moving to the next level of advertising (web banner))
• Advertising on race cars (innovative the first time, but, now?)
• Logo's on our clothing? Okay, Gap and Old Navy made it a success and it was very innovative, but, now, it is same old, same old
• Running an ad before a movie starts - innovative the first time it was ever done, but, now, it is an irritant

You get the idea - innovation occurs very rarely in the marketing industry. Innovation in technology occurs once a day; innovation in marketing occurs once a year.

Capturing the attention of a market is 99% done by using proven marketing methodology (previous marketing programs).

So, back to how I started - CMO's and everyone else saying "We need marketing innovation" is a non-starter for me. Yes, it may occur, and g*d bless you if it occurs during your watch.

But, most of the time, you have a staff, a board, and mentors who have that "innovative idea" once a year or once a lifetime. If it occurs during a time when you can use it, when you have the funding, then, yes, you have a marketing innovation.

But, deciding to give away an "orange" t-shirt with your logo on it, instead of the cheaper common white t-shirt, is not innovation.

Do the market research.

Do the market segmentation and studies.

Know your market.

Plan your marketing strategy around that market.

And implement your marketing plan. If it is using something NEVER BEFORE SEEN in the market, then, you may have innovation. But, having a caveman as your spokesperson is not innovative, it is new and unique (and successful!).

Convincing your market to purchase your product has nothing to do with innovation (in my opinion); it has everything to do with communicating your message correctly and to the right audience.

If, using a sock puppet puts your product on the map, yes, that is innovative, but, does it continue to speak to your audience and drive sales.

Sometimes, a $10K ad, every week, in the New York Times will drive more sales then spending $10M on a new innovative way to market to your audience.

Don't let the "innovation" hype scare you - if you know marketing, if you know how to speak to your audience, then, the innovation will follow - you don't have to lead with it.

Posted by blaine at 08:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Insurance

If you are a small entrepreneur or a small company - you must seriously consider insurance when conducting business.

Recently, I purchased just $1M liability insurance for my current venture. For less then $500.

But, there have been to many times in my life where I have come across a company that didn't "know" any better or just didn't want to spend the money.

In todays America, the lawyers (sadly) rule the majority of how a business "does" business. And one of the first things any business owner knows and addresses is, protect yourself!!!

Recently I worked for a semi-conductor company that never had insurance. Why? Because the chips inside a product were never in direct contact with a consumer, thus, were never and would never be a risk to a consumer (like death, dismemberment, etc.).

When we started to put out the companies first consumer product, the CFO and CEO fought me (us) tooth and nail as to "stupid" reason that we needed to spend money on an item that would not start a fire, or cause a company to lose a billion dollars, or whatever. 

By the way, the product was the USB Flash Drive.

So, I had put together all the packaging, pricing, etc. (and warranty - see the post on that one to see how that turned out), presented it to the CEO, CFO, and board, and then brought up that I wanted $20M in bond insurance.

They said why? We hadn't even started to ship the product yet.

I said, because when we ship that first product (which happened the next week), we needed to be protected from all the frivolous lawsuits that were bound to occur.

Again, they asked why?

I said, specifically to the CFO, who had two young children - "Imagine you are an American who sues over anything - like coffee being too hot; and your child swallows the USB Flash Drive, chokes, and dies. What would you do?"

Within two days, I had insurance for $100M to cover out products.

Don't be shortsighted - yes, it does cost some money, but, protect yourself - don't be argumentative with yourself, your accountant, or business partner - do this.

As the saying is - when you don't do something, will be when you need it.

Posted by blaine at 04:27 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

What you think and what is reality

Was talking with another consulting firm the other day about a current project that they were working on. The consultants were asking me to help them on the project with their marketing plans, etc - but, they first needed to put together the business plan for their client (a start-up with less then a $1M financial backing). 

We discussed the market, as they see it, and where the product that the company makes will be sold.

Surprisingly, they stated that all companies in this field have to do A, then B, and then, C will happen (where C is the purchase of the company and everyone goes home a millionaire).

I asked them why they had to do A, when going to B would be shorter and quicker time to market. They stated, "no, this is how it is done".

We then continued to speak about their target market, which was youth - 21 - 26 years old, primarily men.

I brought up a couple of points about how to get to B so they could skip A, and they said "Yes, thought about that, but, again, the right way is to go the way we have planned".

I can't tell you the details (you know, confidentiality, etc.), but, the point that I want to make is the following:

• Don't think that you have to do what the others do in the market (i.e. you don't always have to follow the same path as everyone else)
• Feel free to explore more then one path when approaching the market - yes, there may be a "best" way to do it, but, at times, the "other" ways may pay off and be the real "yellow brick road"
• Be IMAGINITIVE - CREATIVE - OPEN MINDED when looking at new or even existing markets. Don't be pigeon-holed or held-up that you have to do it a certain way

I guess, the last bullet above, is what always makes my previous employers and clients say that I am argumentative at times - because I want them to look at the whole picture, at the other pieces of the pie (and how it affects us) - so much time, effort, and money is lost because people don't use vision - they don't look ahead to what will be in 3, 5, 10 years (see other postings on this subject).

Good luck, and don't look at the ground, look up and see what's coming.

Posted by blaine at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)